Advertisement

World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 34, Issue 8, pp 1954–1958 | Cite as

Robotic Colon and Rectal Surgery: A Series of 131 Cases

  • Andrea Zimmern
  • Leela Prasad
  • Ashwin deSouza
  • Slawomir Marecik
  • John Park
  • Herand Abcarian
Article

Abstract

Background

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery has become a mainstay in the treatment of benign and malignant colorectal diseases. There are inherent limitations to conventional laparoscopy which can be overcome by the robot. Here we present our experience with 131 cases of robotic and robot-assisted colon and rectal resections.

Methods

This is a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. From August 2005 through June 2009, we performed a total of 131 totally robotic and robot-assisted colorectal resections. These included 42 right colectomies (RC), 16 anterior resections (AR) for benign disease, 8 AR with rectopexy for prolapse, 7 total proctocolectomies (TPC), 47 low and ultralow anterior resections (LAR) for rectal cancer, and 11 abdominal perineal resections (APR). All LARs were done as a hybrid procedure (laparoscopic splenic flexure mobilization followed by robotic rectal dissection), and all APR specimens were extracted through the perineal incision. All coloanal anastomoses were diverted with a loop ileostomy.

Results

There were no intraoperative complications in this series. Postoperative complications included 10 patients with ileus or small bowel obstruction (SBO), 2 patients with anastomotic leaks, 1 patient with an abscess, and 3 patients with temporary peripheral neuropathy that resolved spontaneously. Five patients required reoperation and there were a total of 4 conversions (3.7%) across all case types.

Conclusions

Robotic colon and rectal resections are safe and feasible options for the treatment of both benign and malignant disease processes. Further studies comparing oncologic and perioperative outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic, and open techniques are needed to determine the utility and efficacy of this technology in the field of colorectal surgery.

Keywords

Total Mesorectal Excision Rectal Resection Conventional Laparoscopy Coloanal Anastomosis Purse String 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Jung YW, Lee DW, Kim SW et al (2010) Robot-assisted staging using three robotic arms for endometrial cancer: comparison to laparoscopy and laparotomy at a single institution. J Surg Oncol 101:116–121PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ et al (2009) Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a review of current outcomes. BJU Int 104:1428–1435CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hakimi AA, Blitstein J, Feder M et al (2009) Direct comparison of surgical and functional outcomes of robotic-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: single-surgeon experience. Urology 73:119–123CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rozet F, Jaffe J, Braud G et al (2007) A direct comparison of robotic assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single institution experience. J Urol 178:478–482CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lowe MP, Chamberlain DH, Kamelle SA et al (2009) A multi-institutional experience with robotic-assisted radical hysterectomy for early stage cervical cancer. Gynecol Oncol 113:191–194CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Luca F, Cenciarelli S, Valvo M et al (2009) Full robotic left colon and rectal cancer resection: technique and early outcome. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1274–1278CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Balch GC (2009) Emerging role of laparoscopic and robotic surgery for rectal cancers. Ann Surg Oncol 16:1451–1453CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Guillou PJ, Quirke P, Thorpe H et al (2005) Short-term end points of conventional versus laparoscopic-assisted surgery in patients with colorectal cancer (MRC CLASSIC trial): multicenter randomized controlled trial. Lancet 365:1718–1726CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spinoglio G, Summa M, Prioria F et al (2008) Robotic colorectal surgery: first 50 cases experience. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1627–1632CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    D’Annibale A, Morpurgo E, Fiscon V et al (2004) Robotic and laparoscopic surgery for treatment of colorectal diseases. Dis Colon Rectum 47:2162–2168CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Baik SH, Ko YT, Kang CM et al (2008) Robotic tumor-specific mesorectal excision of rectal cancer: short-term outcome of a pilot randomized trial. Surg Endosc 22:1601–1608CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Soravia C, Schwieger I, Witzig JA et al (2008) Laparoscopic robotic-assisted gastrointestinal surgery: the Geneva experience. J Robotic Surg 1:291–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hellan M, Stein H, Pigazzi A (2009) Totally robotic low anterior resection with total mesorectal excision and splenic flexure mobilization. Surg Endosc 23:447–451CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Blumetti J, deSouza AL, Prasad LM (2009) Hybrid laparoscopic-robotic low anterior resection. Semin Colon Rectal Surg 20:181–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Andrea Zimmern
    • 1
    • 2
  • Leela Prasad
    • 1
    • 2
  • Ashwin deSouza
    • 1
    • 2
  • Slawomir Marecik
    • 2
  • John Park
    • 2
  • Herand Abcarian
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of SurgeryUniversity of Illinois Medical Center at ChicagoChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Center for Robotic SurgeryAdvocate Lutheran General HospitalPark RidgeUSA

Personalised recommendations